While I was on my latest social media hiatus journalist Jess Machado posted her first interview on her new YouTube (YT) channel. Who did she choose as her subject? Notorious anti-free Karen Read (AFKR) figure, Kate Peter (KP) (or  "Krusty Panties" as fellow journalist Aidan Kearny has dubbed her). I have not watched the interview nor do I intend to - why would I subject myself to a known liar lying? Jess had to know that FKR would have feelings about this particular choice, that many of her "besties" would experience shock and disappointment. Unless KP came clean about her true reason for her AFKR stance and how it really was all about her hatred of Aidan. Dang it, now I just might hafta take a peek.

However, from what I'm seeing on X, it seems people are upset with Jess for publicly airing grievances with LTL media, a YT channel she appeared on weekly during the second trial of Karen Read. Particularly about a video that may or may not exist regarding the death of Mass. State Trooper trainee Enrique Delgado Garcia. This is a story that Brian of LTL has had his teeth sunk into since the end of last year, 2024. Garcia purportedly died of a brain aneurism during a training exercise although I'm wondering if that happened before or after his neck was broken (amongst other injuries). Hell of a coincidence, right?

Apparently, Brian gave Jess a glimpse of said video and claims she could've asked him to play it if she wanted to see the whole thing. Jess wonders why he hasn't shared it with the world. Brian has also said he does not actually possess it but has seen it. Logic dictates to me that Jess is the one telling the truth. And I think she's probably been pushing him to do something constructive with it. How much more could a paid guest do? Yes, that's the other thing that has stuck in the craw of many: Jess required payment to appear on Brian's show - an arrangement that both seemed comfortable with. This may well be standard in the TV industry but it strikes an odd chord with those of us who consume our news via social media.

Now I'm gonna rewind my way back to the reason for my hiatus - the downfall of someone we saw as a staunch supporter of Karen Read, Estey, and the rise of a pain in the ass named John Baron who seemed particularly aggrieved by another staunch FKR, Nan AKA Lawferio. I don't believe the two are connected, they just happened around the same time. It seems Estey just likes to sucker fish to large trials, her last one being another that is near and dear to my heart: Johnny Depp v Amber Heard (I'm JD all the way, BTW). As for John Baron, it turns out that it was an account shared by AFKR and FKR personalities. I have no idea why they picked on Nan. Jealousy and/or boredom are the only things that spring to mind. It's the height of stupidity to defame a successful lawyer, IMO.

Just for funsies, let's wrap all of this up and tie it with a ribbon called, "I was disappointed in Karen Read's party & other disgruntlements." LTL/Brian said he just sat back and observed the party because that's just how he is, now he's upset about not being included more. Or maybe it's more about not getting the recognition he thought he'd earned which is what Rita Lombardi's and Sean on the Gulf's complaints were about, too. Personally, what I do is because I feel it's right, not because I want kudos. I mean, they're nice, don't get me wrong, but they're not my reason d'etre. I'm about the same age as Rita & Sean - we're of an age that we're supposed to have some wisdom. Aparently that's about as rare as common sense.

In the end, I guess it comes down to what I'm willing to tolerate. I'm all for good fun but not when it comes at the expense of others. I guess I'm simply not up for schadenfreude.

Schadenfreude refers to the joy you might feel at another person’s pain. It’s a compound of the German nouns Schaden, meaning “damage,” and Freude, meaning “joy.”  Merriam-Webster

Former (supposed) FBI agent Jennifer Coffindaffer says some ridiculous things on X regarding the Karen Read trial (amongst others). This one caught my eye yesterday:

Let's break it down:

The Top Ten Reasons why I can't Wait for the Karen Read trial to be over:

1-Tired of all the dissent in the True Crime Community. 

Most of those in the "True Crime Community" realize that, at the very least, the investigation was sorely lacking thus engendering feelings of a whole shit ton of reasonable doubt. People who truly believe Karen Read is guilty should be mad as hell at disgraced former trooper Michael Proctor yet they're not. I find this incredibly odd. It's almost like they agree with his whole "pin it on the girl" strategy.

2-Tired of trying to explain that there is 0 proof that an ATF Agent (who has his job and was not reprimanded in anyway much less accused of murder), a 30+ year Boston Police Officer (featured on Boston's Finest and retired with distinction about 2 years After the crime), a dog (sent to Vermont months after the crime due to a fight she had with another dog), and a minor (not even worth mentioning) Murdered John O'Keefe and brilliantly threw him in their front lawn.

So, stop trying to excuse ... er, explain stuff regarding people you don't even know. Higgins is on desk duty (last we heard, anyway), Brian Albert has a history of beating people up, a dog whose owners called the poor girl "it" and made her disappear the night of the incident only for her to reappear then end up being "rehomed," and a thug in the making. Btw, it's curious that you, of all people, knew where Chloe supposedly was when even the defense team didn't. The rest of us learned during her "mom" Nichole Albert's testimony well into trial #1. Another oddity, IMO.

3- Tired of listening to Alessi. 

I'm so sorry that Alessi is too smart and well spoken for some to understand. Personally, I'm tired of Hank Brennan's incessant whining. 

4- Tired of watching Karen Read's courtroom antics. 

No idea what you're talking about here. Do you mean her being an active and valued member of her own defense team?

5- Tired of reading all of the dribble from those who haven't watched the trial but pretend they have.

I think the word you're looking for is "drivel" and those who rebut you probably *have* watched the trial, you just don't like their viewpoints. Many also probably watched some, if not all, pretrial (especially for this second trial). I certainly have. The CW's own ME said Ofc O'Keefe's injuries were inconsistent with a motor vehicle strike. What are we even doing here?

6- Tired of the podcasters flushing truth for viewership.

Same girl, same but opposite. I'm tired of those that have flushed their integrity in order to push the CW's false narrative. However, I'm glad to weed out those who apparently lack critical thinking skills.

7- Tired of the Blogger's filthy mouth and lies. 

So don't watch/listen to him or read his articles. Easy fix, right?

8- Tired of Watching the Fan.

Agreed.

9- Tired of a simple Occam's Razor Domestic Violence case being made into a Cecil B. Deville drama fest.

I'm tired of people who think that cops running a crappy investigation is A-OK as long as whoever they deem to be the "bad guy" gets put away. I'm also tired of people shitting on our US Constitution and using the Bill of Rights to wipe their ass.

And number 10: Tired of watching a spoiled one continue to mock the death of a wonderful soul named John O'Keefe.

Nobody finds humor in the death of OFFICER John O'Keefe. Many see the tragedy in that some of his fellow brothers in blue didn't give him the honor he was due by conducting a proper investigation, exploring all avenues, in order to figure out what truly happened to him. Instead, he was just "a man," "the guy," and, ultimately, the victim. He's not even referred to as a Boston Police Officer in much of the CW's case. 

I will continue to advocate for justice in this case because it's the right thing to do.

Justice means not trampling over someone's rights. It means recognizing shoddy police work. It means not rushing to judgement. It means a thorough and proper investigation. It means not resorting to trickery in an attempt to secure a conviction. It means not ignoring inconvenient truths. 

This trial has brought to light how some DA's offices along with their local law enforcement sometimes works to railroad innocnt people. As attorney Mark Bederow likes to say, they're supposed to be the good guys. With Karen Read, we're seeing that's not always the case which is pretty eye opening, IMO. I have learned to take a closer look at how cases are investigated and garnered even more appreciation for the role of defense attorneys. Like many others, I've come to understand that the government does not generally have our best interest in mind. Sometimes they need their feet held to the fire. We can learn much from criminal defense attorneys Bob & Ali Motta (Defense Diaries), Andrea Burkhart (Andrea Burkhart), Ian Runkle (Runkle of the Bailey) and Natalie Whittingham Burrell (natalielawyerchick) as well as former prosecutor Emily D. Baker (The Emily Show). I would be remiss if I did not mention Attorney Melanie Little for complete covereage since pre-trial 1 and Peter Tragos (Lawyer You Know) for his unbiased and nuanced coverage. These are just a handful of lawyers on social media that are covering and/or commenting on this case. Those worth following point out the myriad of issues and just how much reasonable doubt there is.

FREE KAREN READ

Those of us who sat through the interminable first trial of Karen Read had some tempered hope when an outsider, defense attorney Hank Brennan, was brought into for this retrial. That this newly appointed special ADA would look through the evidence and ask Michael Morrissey WTF he was thinking when he brought charges against Karen. Or, at minimum, recognize the overreach of the second degree murder charge. These hopes were dashed when Brennan switched from wanting a fair trial for Karen to wanting one for the Commonwealth of MA (CW).* He seemed determined to dig deeply into the federal investigation of the investigation of the death of Officer John O'Keefe but not in the direction that those of us on the FKR side hoped he would. He completely ignored the exculpatory information provided by the feds in a 3000+ page Touhey report. Instead it seems he did his level best to figure out what the government had on the Norfolk County DA's Office (NCDAO). When he failed at that, he attempted to discredit the defense in as dirty a way as possible: Make it look like they were colluding with the FBI or, at the very least, their experts from ARCCA who opined that John was not hit by Karen's car and Karen's car was not damaged by hitting John.

Did I mention that Hank Brennan was on the team that unsuccessfully defended James "Whitey" Bulger, infamous Irish mob boss and murderer? And that he cried at his funeral? I personally did not know this when he was first appointed but it makes sense now. Who better to defend the NCDAO than a mob lawyer? That's how those in the know were describing him from the beginning. I though that nobody could be worse than DA Michael Morrissey and his corrupt crew: ADA Adam Lally & ADA Laura McLaughlin. Boy was I wrong! Lally mumble fumbled his way through the first trial, using "what if any" so many times I wanted to smack my head into my keyboard. Droning on about the snow and high top tables and shoveling aprons until I thought my ears were gonna bleed. Then along came Hank Brennan and his incessant whining. Suddenly, I missed Lally, which I didn't think would ever be possible. Speaking of, has anybody else noticed that Lally turned into a real prosecutor under Hank's tutelage? Suddenly he's loud, clear and concise with his questioning although he's been relegated to the most minor and most boring of witnesses. 

Brennan has been running this trial like a defense attorney trying to trip up witnesses during cross examination. In other words, his presentation does not seem to be linear (what follows is not necessarily in order): EMS first responders, Kerry Roberts, more EMS first responders, Sara Levinson (who was inside 24 Fairview that night), Ian Wiffen & Jessica Hyde (the CW's two cell phone experts), Jennifer McCabe, retired Canton police dept. Sgt. Paul Gallagher (who arrived after John O'Keefe was transported to the hospital), Yuri Bukhenik (lead investigator Michael Proctor's supervisor and partner). Oh, and the two passangers of the vehicle that arrived and left 34 Fairview during the time Karen Read was outside in her Lexus waiting to hear from John O'Keefe (but not the driver for whatever reason). MST Nicholas Guarino also took the stand a few times to enter John's & Karen's cell phone evidence. Notably absent were any police officers that first responded to the scene, the lead investigator and the medical examiner, all of which are generally standard witnesses in a criminal case.

Jen McCabe, an early witness in this retrial, received a glow up from the last trial. She mostly remained cool, calm and collected during her 3 days of testimony. She and most of the EMS personnel that testified earnestly stated that their memories have gotten better over time. You would think that people even tangentially involved in law enforcement would know that this is patently untrue. However, I guess it's as true as Trooper Paul's grasp on physics in his "accident reconstruction" for the last trial that had poor officer John O'Keefe bouncing off of his head and pirouetting onto the lawn of 34 Fairview on that fateful morning. Hopefully their new expert, Dr. Welcher of Aperture, has a more cogent argument.

A bunch of physical evidence has been presented but there doesn't seem to be any logs attesting to their provenance. Plainly said, there doesn't seem to be  any chain of custody on anything. The scene at 34 Fairview was left unsupervised from before 8 am until after 4 pm that day. John's clothing was discovered on the hospital floor (which makes sense), loaded into a paper lawn & leaf size bag by Bukhenik and Proctor, rode around in their car most of the day, then laid out on butcher paper at the NCDAO. It was logged into evidence six weeks later and two pieces were ensconced in plexiglass between the first and second trial. John's shoes, one of which was found at the hospital with the other found on the lawn of 34 Fairview, both seemed to end up in property bags identifying the latter location. A recess was called to address the problem then, magically, the second shoe was pulled out of a bag that said it was from the hospital. It also seems that Proctor just filled out evidence bags with either his or Bukhenik's names as he saw fit. There were no crime scene services (CSS) photos of the 47 pieces of tail light that "revealed themselves" over a good 3 weeks. A bunch had no pics at all. There was no sketch made of what was found where at the crime scene. It was never even established exactly where John O'Keefe was found, much less orientation or any kind of measurements. 

This case is an absolute clusterfuck and, so far, the prosecution has not proven a damn thing, IMO. We're over 3 weeks in and the jury has not heard what John's actual cause of death was determined to be. In this way, Brennan's bunny hop approach resembles Lally's slogfest in trial 1. Emily D. Baker has some excellent daily briefs if you want to follow along.

Remember: The truth does not change. Data doesn't lie, people do! FREE KAREN READ

*The US constitution only guarantees a fair trial for those accused of crimes not for the bodies accusing them.